[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <DEOF3L4CJBHA.Q5OSQSIWCD0K@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:53:24 +0100
From: "Tobias Schumacher" <ts@...ux.ibm.com>
To: "Gerd Bayer" <gbayer@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Tobias Schumacher"
<ts@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Heiko Carstens" <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Vasily Gorbik"
<gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Sven Schnelle"
<svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Niklas Schnelle" <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Gerald
Schaefer" <gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Halil Pasic"
<pasic@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Matthew Rosato" <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Thomas
Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] s390/pci: Migrate s390 IRQ logic to IRQ domain
API
On Tue Dec 2, 2025 at 7:14 PM CET, Gerd Bayer wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-11-27 at 16:07 +0100, Tobias Schumacher wrote:
> [ ... snip ... ]
>
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/pci/pci_irq.c b/arch/s390/pci/pci_irq.c
>> index e73be96ce5fe6473fc193d65b8f0ff635d6a98ba..2ac0fab605a83a2f06be6a0a68718e528125ced6 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/pci/pci_irq.c
>> +++ b/arch/s390/pci/pci_irq.c
>> @@ -290,146 +325,196 @@ static int __alloc_airq(struct zpci_dev *zdev, int msi_vecs,
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> -int arch_setup_msi_irqs(struct pci_dev *pdev, int nvec, int type)
>> +bool arch_restore_msi_irqs(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> {
>> - unsigned int hwirq, msi_vecs, irqs_per_msi, i, cpu;
>> struct zpci_dev *zdev = to_zpci(pdev);
>> - struct msi_desc *msi;
>> - struct msi_msg msg;
>> - unsigned long bit;
>> - int cpu_addr;
>> - int rc, irq;
>>
>> + zpci_set_irq(zdev);
>> + return true;
>> +}
>>
>
> It's always a little tricky to distinguish which code handles both MSI
> and MSI-X or just MSI proper when routines have _msi_ in their name.
> But apparently, both __pci_restore_msi_state() and
> __pci_restore_msix_state() inside pci_restore_msi_state() do call
> arch_restore_msi_irqs() - so life is good!
Regarding arch_restore_msi_irqs() the main change in the patchset is
that it is now also conditionally called from zpci_reenable_device().
This is becasue in the recovery case, __pci_restore_msix_state() does
not call arch_restore_msi_irqs(), it exits directly at the beginning
because dev->msix_enabled evaluates to false.
With the legacy API, IRQs are later re-enabled using
arch_setup_msi_irqs(), which also registers the airq with the hw. With
the MSI parent domain, zpci_msi_prepare() would register the airq, but
is not called in the recovery path. This is why it is now added to
zpci_reenable_device()
> [ ... snip ... ]
>
>> +static void zpci_msi_domain_free(struct irq_domain *domain, unsigned int virq,
>> + unsigned int nr_irqs)
>> +{
>> + struct irq_data *d;
>> + int i;
>>
>> - return (zdev->msi_nr_irqs == nvec) ? 0 : zdev->msi_nr_irqs;
>> + for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {
>> + d = irq_domain_get_irq_data(domain, virq + i);
>> + irq_domain_reset_irq_data(d);
>
> Question: zpci_msi_alloc_domain() did modify airq data, can this be
> left as is in zpci_msi_domain_free()?
I was thinking about this myself and came to the conclusion that it is
fine. zpci_msi_domain_alloc() sets the ptr to the msi parent domain and
data to the encoded hwirq. Both fields are only required in the IRQ
handler.
* When free() is called, the corresponding interrupt was already
deactivated by the hardware, so hardware shouldn't generate it
anymore anyway.
* If, for whatever reason, hw still generates the interrupt,
generic_handle_domain_irq returns an error since the hwirq cannot be
resolved.
* If the IRQ gets allocated again, the fields are written again before
the IRQ is activated. The data written will even be the same
as it was before.
> [ ... snip ... ]
>
>
>> +
>> +int zpci_create_parent_msi_domain(struct zpci_bus *zbus)
>> +{
>> + char fwnode_name[18];
>>
>> - if (zdev->aisb != -1UL) {
>> - zpci_ibv[zdev->aisb] = NULL;
>> - airq_iv_free_bit(zpci_sbv, zdev->aisb);
>> - zdev->aisb = -1UL;
>> + snprintf(fwnode_name, sizeof(fwnode_name), "ZPCI_MSI_DOM_%04x", zbus->domain_nr);
>> + struct irq_domain_info info = {
>> + .fwnode = irq_domain_alloc_named_fwnode(fwnode_name),
>> + .ops = &zpci_msi_domain_ops,
>> + };
>> +
>> + if (!info.fwnode) {
>> + pr_err("Failed to allocate fwnode for MSI IRQ domain\n");
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> }
>> - if (zdev->aibv) {
>> - airq_iv_release(zdev->aibv);
>> - zdev->aibv = NULL;
>> +
>> + if (irq_delivery == FLOATING)
>> + zpci_msi_parent_ops.required_flags |= MSI_FLAG_NO_AFFINITY;
>
> Add empty line here, so the intent is clear that the following
> assignment is executed unconditionally.
Ok.
> [ ... snip ... ]
>
>> @@ -466,6 +551,7 @@ static int __init zpci_directed_irq_init(void)
>> * is only done on the first vector.
>> */
>> zpci_ibv[cpu] = airq_iv_create(cache_line_size() * BITS_PER_BYTE,
>> + AIRQ_IV_PTR |
>> AIRQ_IV_DATA |
>> AIRQ_IV_CACHELINE |
>> (!cpu ? AIRQ_IV_ALLOC : 0), NULL);
>
>
> This looks very good to me already. Unfortunately, I was unable to
> relieve my MSI vs. MSI-X anxiety regarding arch_restore_msi_irqs() with
> a test since the only MSI-using PCI function (ISM) is not supporting
> PCI auto-recovery :(
>
> But a mlx5 VF now recovers just fine!
Did my expanation above help with this?
Thanks
Tobias
Powered by blists - more mailing lists